Jump to content

User talk:Mk5384: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Mk5384 (talk | contribs)
Mk5384 (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 148: Line 148:


== unblock request ==
== unblock request ==

Are you just flat out refusing to answer me? You have blocked me for reporting the behavior of another editor. Honestly, what the fuck is up with that? You chickenshit motherfucking coward!!!!!!!!! YOU ACTUALLY FUCKING BLOCKED ME FOR REPORTING THE BEHAVIOR OF ANOTHER EDITOR? OK MOTHERFUCKER, IT'S ON. I've already showed you that I can evade your silly blocks. That's cool. I enjoy a challenge.

Revision as of 19:26, 28 March 2010

Hello Mk5384, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.


Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Mk5384, good luck, and have fun. ----RrburkeekrubrR 14:20, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mk5384 (talk) 07:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 19:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mk5384. I note that you seem to have ended up in an edit war at Blackjack. Please understand that while your contributions are appreciated, things we happen to know to be true from our own experience are not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia articles unless they have also been previously published in a reliable source. And the onus to provide sources falls on the editor wishing to add (not remove) material: material about which editors have doubts can be removed without the need for a rebutting source.

Please consider having a look at Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:3RR. If you have questions, I'm happy to help. --RrburkeekrubrR 15:46, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Mk5384, let me add that you really should not come on to a forum and assume you know more than everyone else. Also, using terms like "clown," to rfefer to editors, as you just did on Mitted's page, is a violation of WP:CIV. Something Mitted knows a lot about having been blocked after repeatedly blanking my Talk page. We are all volunteers here.Objective3000 (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Malcolm X

Hello. You've added the name "Malcolm Shabazz" to Malcolm X twice. Under Wikipedia's policies, we can't include that in the article unless you can provide reliable sources that indicate Malcolm X was known by that name. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 06:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I double-checked, and I can't find "Malcolm Shabazz" in The Autobiography of Malcolm X. As I wrote, that information can't stay in the article unless there are reliable sources that indicate Malcolm X was known by that name. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:40, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(1) I reviewed the Autobiography and searched an e-book version. No occurrence of "Malcolm Shabazz".
(2) Except for a few uses, such as Malcolm Shabazz City High School, Masjid Malcolm Shabazz and the Malcolm Shabazz Market, I can't find any indication that Malcolm X was known as "Malcolm Shabazz".
(3) Even if we could find a few mentions of Malcolm X as "Malcolm Shabazz", the purpose of the infobox and the first sentence is to include the most important names by which a person was known. We don't include "Red", "Detroit Red", "Satan", "Omowale", or any of the other names or nicknames by which Malcolm X was known because they're not significant. Likewise, we wouldn't include "Malcolm Shabazz" because it's not significant. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 22:11, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Claude Choules

Hi Mk5384

Just following up our discussion re Mr Choules, I found this on a non-authoritative website dealing with the history of HMS Revenge [1]

Post Jutland she performed manoeuvres and sweeps of the North Sea but the German fleet never again put to sea in force, in November 1916 Revenge became the flagship of Admiral Madden – the second in command of the Grand Fleet,. In 1917 she was refitted at an unknown port and on the 05th November 1918 she was at anchor in the Firth of Forth when the Campania, an auxiliary sea-plane carrier dragged her anchor and collided with the bows of the Revenge, Revenge received moderate damage repaired at Rosyth but the Campania sank In 1919 Revenge had a stern-walk added for her role as flagship, she was the only one of her class so fitted and thus easily identified.

and this from the Battle of Jutland article on the Encyclopaedia Britannica CD 2001 edition:

The British had sustained greater losses than the Germans in both ships and men. In all, the British lost three battle cruisers, three cruisers, eight destroyers, and 6,274 officers and men in the Battle of Jutland. The Germans lost one battleship, one battle cruiser, four light cruisers, five destroyers, and 2,545 officers and men. The losses inflicted on the British, however, were not enough to affect the numerical superiority of their fleet over the German in the North Sea, where their domination remained practically unchallengeable during the course of the war. Henceforth, the German High Seas Fleet chose not to venture out from the safety of its home ports.

I suppose there would have been a risk from German U-boats and mines, but in terms of actual combat, I think we would be struggling to find anything. Cheers Moldovanmickey (talk) 23:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there again,

Thanks for your message. Do let me know if you find out anything more from Mr Choules' book. I think that he actually wrote it in his 80s but it has only just been published. He is 109 tomorrow, and from reports on the net, he is very frail, blind and almost completely deaf. Let us hope that he is able to have some enjoyment in his remaining time. I keep meaning to buy Harry Patch's book and have read chunks of it in the local bookshop- I was fortunate enough to see Mr Patch, Mr Allingham and Mr Stone at the Cenotaph in London on November 11th 2008 and was also able to attend Mr Patch's funeral last year, and a very moving and appropriate service it was too. If you would like me to scan and e-mail a copy of the Order of Service for you, leave your e-mail address on my talk page and I'll sort that out for you.

Cheers,Moldovanmickey (talk) 21:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One final thought, on the definition of "combatant". My Concise Oxford Dictionary defines this as a (person) that fights, whilst Merriam-Webster [2]defines it as one that is engaged in or ready to engage in combat, so on the latter definition, Mr Choules could be described as a combatant without actually having seen any combat; on the first definition he could not. It just shows what a cruel mistress the English language can be- there may even be a different emphasis in American as opposed to British English. You do seem to be favouring the first definition, however, as I would.

Moldovanmickey (talk) 23:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. The Royal Logistics Corps Museum, Princess Royal Barracks, Deepcut, Camberley, GU16 6RW, per the website [3], there is also a website for the Friends of the Royal Logistic Corps Museum at [4]. I wouldn't claim to have much knowledge about Armed Forces history, by the way! One further thought I had is to try to contact Richard van Endem for his opinion in view of this book [5], which I haven't read, although I seem to recall he made a fairly oblique reference to the Surviving First World War Veterans wikipdia pages in Harry Patch's book- I think he called it "slightly morbid" or something similar... I only mention this as as you know, Netherwood Hughes was never officially recognised as a veteran due to the absence of any records. I think wikipedians in the end took the view that if Dennis Goodwin recognised him, that was good enough! Of course, he got nowhere with Mr Terrey's case. Good luck! Moldovanmickey (talk) 17:15, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Re:Sealand

You're welcome! The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think to make it fit in we should just go along with the rest of the appropriate additions in the list, but I thought I had added it the same way as the rest of the list for the unrecognised states. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:24, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see what you mean, then yes. Have Prince go to Prince of Sealand (If such a page exists) and just leave Roy I as it is with it's link to Mr Bates. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:20, 6 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well we have the backlash now as it's been removed, their defense being that it's not sovereign. I would go back again but I fear I may be subject of an attempt to be blocked under the 3RR rule. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 22:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, great. If it's been up for 3 days I doubt they'll delete it in future without good reason The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Avoiding 3RR in Allen Iverson

Hey, I wanted to remind you that Wikipedia:Edit warring applies even if you don't breach the letter of WP:3RR and wait 24 hours before making your fourth revert. Now, I realize that I'm not an impartial editor in this dispute. But what consensus exists is against you, and the burden is on you to convince other editors why Iverson should be considered a former member of the 76ers, even though he is under contract, on the roster and collecting a paycheck from the team. Your edit seems to run afoul of WP:V and WP:CRYSTAL. --Mosmof (talk) 01:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I should have WP:AGF'd. --Mosmof (talk) 04:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Service Awards

I noticed that you had trouble getting the auto updating template to work correctly. The various parameters listed here in the documentation should help you understand what is going on. Since you display multiple awards, you may want to consider using the format parameter so that they are all auto updating. Hope this helps. Set Sail For The Seven Seas 222° 37' 15" NET 14:50, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You've made a number of edits claiming that Bill Bruford's website demonstrates that he's been doing studio work since his retirement date of 1 Jan 2009. I can see nothing on Bruford's website to support that. Can you be more specific in terms of a particular webpage (URL) or project? Bondegezou (talk) 13:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:OberRanks

OberRanks posted on WP:AN/I about your repeated posting of messages on User talk:OberRanks after being reverted. It's usually considered bad form to continue posting like that, and in the worst case, could be considered harassment and lead to sanctions. Also, telling people to "grow up" and referring to their comments as "juvenile nonsense" does not comply terribly well with Wikipedia's civility guidelines. Please be more careful with what you type in the future. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 04:25, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reporting you to ANI for your "promise" to resume disruption once page protection expires:[6]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots14:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have been reported as well for removing comments made by other users. -OberRanks (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

Please stop. If you continue to delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:John J. Pershing, you will be blocked for vandalism. NeilN talk to me 14:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[7], [8] shows the removals. --NeilN talk to me 14:52, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It may have been a mistake on your part but the article history clearly shows you removed Durova's comments twice. --NeilN talk to me 14:56, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest you make your statement on ANI about this based on the assumption that everyone will say the edits were done by your account. There are two options 1) It was a mistake on your part (it happens) or 2) Someone guessed your password and logged in as you (highly unlikely and we have ways to check if edits come from the same computer). Please also consider carefully reading WP:CONSENSUS before commenting on the article further. --NeilN talk to me 15:08, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Help:Edit conflict. If you have any questions, let me know. --NeilN talk to me 15:10, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, do you understand what to do now when you get an edit conflict? This is important as you don't want to be further removing other editors' comments any more even by accident. --NeilN talk to me 15:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To clear up the ANI discussion about the removal of comments I would say something like, "I removed Durova's comments by accident as I received an edit conflict message and was not sure what that was. I understand now and it won't happen again." --NeilN talk to me 15:31, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Mk5384 (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

are you honestly telling me that you blocked me for reporting another user who violated the rules?

Notes:

  • In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
  • Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.
Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=are you honestly telling me that you blocked me for reporting another user who violated the rules? |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=are you honestly telling me that you blocked me for reporting another user who violated the rules? |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=are you honestly telling me that you blocked me for reporting another user who violated the rules? |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

unblock request